Moo Cluck Moo

moo cluck moo graphic
A restaurant in Dearborn, MI, just outside Detroit, with just two locations, has 159,000 google search results. Why? How does a fast food hamburger joint with only two locations, the least expensive combo meal at $7.50 (far more expensive than the competition) and no national advertising budget (not really low, but zero, zip, nada) get this kind of internet buzz?

And these are not just blogs with only twenty readers or just a couple of people chatting with each other. It is praised by MSNBC, The Daily Beast and the Huffington Post. It is also praised by mainline newspapers and restaurant guides which normally shun fast food establishments.

“This Burger Joint Is Raising Its Starting Salary To $15 Per Hour” The Huffington Post

“Radical Fast Food Joint Doubles Down on High Wages”
The Daily Beast

All of this buzz over the salary it pays? Yes. The Huffington Post interviewed Brian Parker, one of the owners. “Parker told HuffPostLive in July that he believes investing in his workers actually benefits his business because the staffers provide better customer service than their colleagues who are working for much less.”
So, the important question is, how does he do it? The business articles are long on praise for paying higher wages, but completely devoid of information on how they do it.

The first and most obvious answer to this puzzle is much higher prices. No dollar menus at Moo Cluck Moo. But their major selling point is all natural food.!menu/c1a9u

The second part of the answer is much lower overhead. They are not part of a franchise which must support a large corporate office with enormous fees. The owners work in the stores. This reduces the need for additional managers, which reduces the expenses for middle management.

The third and from my point of view the most important point is the owner/operators are willing to put more of their profits back into the business. Anyone who has even one undergraduate economics course understands that shareholders and venture capitalists will not tolerate that.

McDonald’s restaurants made a lot of money in 2013. But not as much as expected. “McDonald’s reported $7.09 billion in fourth quarter revenue, a 2% increase over the same quarter in 2012 but under (Wall) Street predictions of $7.14 billion. Fourth quarter net income came in at $1.4 billion, flat compared to the same time in 2012 but resulting in earnings of $1.40 per share, a penny higher than what analysts were calling for.”
In the corporate world, the owners of the company are the shareholders, venture capitalists, banks who loaned the money or whoever actually put up the money for the business. And business owners just look at how much money is being made for them. Call these retirees, the people who actually own most stocks, a bunch of Scrooges and Grinches, but this is how the real world works.

And if you don’t like that, support your local owner/operator. That is, if you can find one.


Leave a comment

Filed under Current Issues, Politics, Education

The Scientific Approach — Post by Michael J. Findley


Science is based on evidence.
What existed from the beginning,
what we have heard,
what we have seen with our eyes,
what we observed and
touched with our own hands—
this is the Word of life!
1 John 1:1 ISV

That which was (existed) from the beginning (original creation) (my translation)
If an experiment or procedure cannot be repeated, it is not scientific. John begins with the scientific observation that God is stable and trustworthy. He established a stable universe where the physical processes (scientific laws) remain fixed and can be used to make things (technology). This is true since the final day of creation.
“Because I the LORD don’t change; therefore you children of Jacob, aren’t destroyed.” (Malachi 3:6 ISV)
That which we comprehended (with our ears, heard) (my translation)
The words were not only heard, but the content was understood. John perceived the sense of what was said.
That which we perceived with our eyes (my translation)
John not only observed with his eyes, but he understood what he was looking at. He grasped the significance of what he observed and paid heed to it.
That which we gazed upon (my translation)
John viewed attentively, as a public show. John used his sight to examine carefully, paying attention to detail.
That which we have examined by touching (my translation)
John used his hands as instruments to examine and verify by touch what his eyes had seen and his ears heard.
Concerning the Word of Life (my translation)
John’s examination, perception, understanding, and grasp of the facts were about the Word of Life.
Using human language as precisely and clearly as he could, John states that he and rest of disciples heard, saw and touched the resurrected Messiah. They understood who and what they examined and knew that their examination was accurate.
This is a testimony of a scientific event, using scientific terminology. We have only two choices. We can accept it or we can reject it.


1 Comment

Filed under Bible Teaching, Education, Scientific

Presuppositionalism: The Worship of Deep Time — Post by Michael J. Findley

coa cover for blog

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams
Here is a brief list of certain facts routinely ignored by Secular Humanists.
1) Secular Humanists worked hard for more than one hundred years for recognition as a religion in the USA. Now they can organize as a 501c3 (charitable organization), as a religion if they so choose.
“The United States Supreme Court has held that secular humanism is a religion. Belief in evolution is a central tenet of that religion.” Antonin Scalia, in the case Edwards v. Aguillard, U.S. Supreme Court, 1987
2) Gratuitous Assertions do not prove, validate, or authenticate your point in any way. Just because you choose to believe something does not automatically make that belief true.
3) Most Creationists are not scientists, just like most Secular Humanists are not scientists. But denying that Creation Science is legitimate simply makes the denier a religious bigot. Refusing to look at a creationist site for the sole reason that the information disproves your belief system is the standard definition of religious bigotry.
That is the opposite of reading articles, documenting (not asserting) the errors and assuming that the same editorial process will continue to produce the same errors. I have done this for One example is included in our book Conflict of the Ages Part Three: The Flood and the Ice Age.
4) There is abundant scientific evidence for a young earth. Gratuitously asserting that the evidence does not exist or that the evidence is false is neither honest nor does it make the evidence go away.
Some examples of this evidence are rapid formation of coal, diamonds, petroleum, petrified wood, and fossils. These are now produced by commercial operations. The modern fossils are of such high quality (so much like geologic fossils) that even National Geographic purchased some modern fossils as geologic fossils.
Even the USGS and the US Parks service admit that evidence points to catastrophic formation of much of earth’s crust. This includes the formation of the Grand Canyon. The only serious disagreement with Creationists is when these catastrophes occurred.
With honest geologists there is no question about how, but only about when. We simply hold that the many well-documented catastrophes in the earth’s past occurred during or soon after the flood.
5) Galileo, Isaac Newton, Gregor Mendel, and thousands of other scientists were either Christians or believers in Intelligent Design. Throughout history Intelligent Design has been the majority position among scientists. This has only changed in the last half of the twentieth century. When Arabic Muslim scientists are included along with South American and African scientists, Intelligent Design might still be the majority position.
6) Denying the possibility of a global flood is dishonest. Many of the imagined problems, such as the amount of water and construction of the ark have been answered in detail.
Noah’s Ark: A Feasibility Study
Number of animals the ark could hold…even-with-70000-animals.html
Water; how much and where did it come from? And where did it go?
7) Secularists often mock Creationists for raising their own funds by selling books, DVDs, charging for events, and asking for donations. These same Secular Humanists have no qualms about living off of government-funded schools and research projects. They complain about Creationists raising their own support while at the same time they live off of money taken by force through the police power of the government.
8) The final, and most important point, is a willingness to examine the evidence honestly.


Filed under Bible Teaching, Current Issues, Politics, Education, History, Scientific

Review of The Bible in World History — Post by Michael J. Findley

bible in world history graphic

The Bible in World History is by Stephen Leston, PhD (in Bible) (Click the image to see the book on

This is the first paper book I have read since converting to ebooks many years ago and I find that I do not like it. It is only available in paper. The type is too small. It is difficult to read in the dark. I miss the easy search functions.

But these are petty complaints. This is a very well-laid out and attractive book. A very honest comment from a 5 star review on Amazon said, “I picked up this book and was originally drawn in by the colorful pictures–there are hundreds of them!!!!!” The beauty and quality of both the artwork and the binding for the price are phenomenal.

The author is a graduate of Master’s International School of Divinity, Evansville, IN.

Another 5 star Amazon review said, “Really enjoyed reading this book. For only 260 pages it really packs a punch. … I appreciated the flow of the book.”
I picked up this book because I am writing on a related topic. There are very few books on the subject of Biblical World History and I am always interested in learning what I can from the very few people who support a Biblical world view.

Most of the people who reviewed the book on Amazon loved it because of the layout, the pictures, and the perspective, and all of these are wonderful.

When I looked at the content, I realized that there is only one footnote. While modern writing style often replaces footnotes with chapter endnotes, there are no endnotes, either. Neither is there a bibliography. There is a brief and vague acknowledgements page, but there are almost no specific references to outside works in the entire book. As another Amazon reviewer who gave the book only two stars correctly observed: “I was hoping for a definitive, citable resource, with, for example, pages of footnotes, acknowledgements, and a lengthy bibliography, a book to help me understand the context in which the Bible was written. This is really the opposite, a glossy, handsome, easy to read book with a general overview of history during the time (including areas far outside of the Middle East, like China, which did not seem germane to my Bible study), coupled with the author’s view of how God had shaped that history. The book has a page and a half of photo credits, and a short list of suggested reading. I view it more as an inspirational book than a history book.”

Though the topical index begins on page 267, pictures, charts, sidebars, and blank spaces take up more than half of the book. 50 pages and more at the beginning consist of commentary on the opening chapters of Genesis. Including the opening commentary, there are only about 125 pages of text for a book on world history.

The commentary is good, but it seems out of balance with the overall brevity of other subjects. There are only thirty one pages covering the first century AD and nothing more recent than the Apostle John.

The book improves as it moves forward in time. That is, at it approaches the modern era.
I wish that there was some way of saying this kindly, but the number of glaring, serious errors seems to indicate that the manuscript was only edited for layout, appearance, spelling, and grammar. It seems to be exceptionally clean in the these areas. But the number of factual errors, which I am certain would be corrected by a careful content editor, are distressing. To keep this from being nothing more than a gratuitous assertion, here are just a few examples.

1) Commenting on the Antediluvian population, p. 24 states, “Leon Morris observes…the earth’s population would have grown to at least 120,000 in the first 800 years.” While exact numbers are impossible to know for certain, the numbers in the book are certainly erroneous. Jewish tradition states that Adam and Eve had 55 children themselves. “Relying on a letter from his friend, Rev Temple Chevallier, professor of mathematics at the University of Durham, [1830s Anglican minister Thomas] Gisborne argued that the number of people on the earth at the time of the Flood would have been in the tens of billions.”

This might not seem important because Dr. Leston is supporting a large population (“at least 120,000 in the first 800 years”) compared to secularists who deny the very existence of the flood and creation. By itself, this would not be worth mentioning.

2) Post-flood technology is attributed to the antediluvian civilizations. page. 24 “ During this time, world witnessed the invention of the wheel, sailing ships, metallurgy, and oven-baked pottery. These inventions were developed in the area called Mesopotamia, the region where the first inhabitants of the earth lived.” As this statement stands, it denies the flood and promotes a uniformitarian point of view. Yet earlier, the author claims that this book opposes secularism. Genesis 4 records antediluvian civilizations developing metallurgy, musical instruments, agriculture and cities, but not the wheel, sailing ships, and oven-baked pottery.

What is important is the reliance on secular conclusions based on radiometric dating of artifacts. We certainly do not know if antediluvian civilizations had wheels, sailing ships, and oven-baked pottery or not. But Dr. Leston seems to rely on uniformitarian dating schemes to arrive at his conclusions. Without citing any references, it is impossible to know why Dr Leston states this. This error is repeated in the chart on page 41.

On page 32 he definitely uses secular reasoning. “In January 1996 National Geographic did a comparison between rodeo riders and their injuries, and skeletons uncovered from the time of Noah.” There are no skeletons from the time of Noah. The oldest skeletons in existence are many years younger than Noah. These are not antediluvian skeletons, because we do not have any antediluvian skeletons to examine.

The earth before the flood was a single continent. The geographic areas we have today very likely did not exist before the breakup of continents. Mesopotamia likely did not exist, nor could people have lived there, until after the breakup of the continents.

3) The strict reading of the chronologies in Genesis give us 1656 years from Adam to the Flood. The LXX (Greek OT) gives us a longer timespan, but it almost universally rejected. If Dr. Leston chose to use the LXX chronology, he owes his readers an explanation as to why. The chart on page 40 has the date of the flood, with a series of question marks, well before 3200 BC. That is older than even the LXX date, yet there is nothing in the chart or text to provide justification for this date. The same chart repeats the error of the inventions of the wheel and pottery before the flood. Perhaps these were invented before the flood, but we have no evidence that Noah and his children knew about the wheel and pottery.

4) Abraham was born 292 years after Noah and his family left the ark. The standard date, using Archbishop Ussher and Isaac Newton’s chronologies, puts leaving the ark at approximately 2350 BC. This roughly fits with the 2166 date in the chart for the birth of Abraham, but it does not fit any of the given dates in the chart for the flood. 2166+292=2458 BC for the flood. What is the 3200 BC date on the chart for? It causes confusion and is not explained in the text.

5) On page 61 “Around 1792 BC, a king named Hammurabi inherited the throne of Babylon from his father.” In uniformitarian dating schemes, this is the commonly accepted “middle position.” Unbelievers are desperate to “prove” that the Law of Moses “evolved.” So the possibility that Hammurabi could be placed around 1200 BC, which is more likely the correct placement of hs law code, is discredited whenever possible, because that would make Hammurabi’s law code almost 250 years after God gave Moses the Law on Sinai. Here is a blog post I wrote about dating Hammurabi’s law code. I would be very interested in investigating the sources for many of the claims about Hammurabi made in this book, but once again, there is no documentation.

6) Without detailing how Dr Leston follows secular Egyptian dating, because his lack of documentation makes it unclear what dating scheme he uses, here are the various Egyptian dating schemes. The last dating system in this article keys Egyptian events to events recorded in the Bible.

7) Page 80 “The framework of this book assumes the earlier ‘high date.’” [for the Exodus] Then why is that date (approximately 1446 BC) not included in the text? The date of the Exodus is the key date for determining the entire dating scheme of the OT. This is particularly confusing because the time chart on page 92 clearly states 1446 BC as the date of the Exodus.

8) And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron…Genesis 4:22 (Antediluvian civilization) But Dr. Leston says on page 80 “The use of smelted and tempered iron became common among the Hittites during the period extending from 1900 to 1400 BC.” Dr. Leston uses the same incorrect arguments put forward by secularists. Bronze is a combination of copper and some other metal. Depending on what other metals are mixed with the copper, it can be harder than steel. It is lighter than iron and does not rust. It is not as abundant as iron and is more difficult to work with. The reasons for switching to iron from copper were economic.

I could list other examples, a few serious, most minor. But this review is not intended to be an attack piece. The many 5-star reviews show this is a much needed work, especially something readable. I just wish that is had been checked for content before it was published.

What I hope for is a second edition of this book with sources, footnotes, or endnotes, a thorough bibliography, and content editing. This might be too much ask, but I would very much like an appendix which explains why certain things were included while others were ignored, because this is very much a needed work.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bible Teaching, Education, Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, History, Scientific

A Snippet and a Giveaway from Archibald and the Fiery Furnace by Laura J. Marshall

Meet Archibald.

Hundreds of years ago, when Archibald was a kitten, no one thought he would survive. The tiniest of the litter, while his brothers and sisters got loving homes, Archibald was forgotten.
Sad and unloved, he sat down, determined to never get back up. That was when God spoke to Archibald for the very first time. He said, in a way only God can speak to someone inside their heart, where no one else can hear, “You’re not alone, Archibald. I am always with you.”
Archibald perked up his ears, but couldn’t see where the voice had come from. “Where are you? Why can’t I see you?” He asked cautiously.
“It would be difficult to understand unless I show you.”
“Then show me.”
“Very well. Close your eyes.”
Archibald closed his eyes where he sat on the hard dirt ground. He first became aware of his own breathing, in and out evenly through his nose and mouth. Then he felt his heart speed up and slow down.
God spoke again, “I created you, Archibald. I am within and around you. I preserve your life.”
The wind increased. It ruffled Archibald’s black fur and he shivered. He opened his eyes to see the branches of the trees around him swaying. A bird burst into song and flapped its wings loudly, flying away.
“And You are in the breeze through the trees and the birds of the air?” Archibald asked, astonishment making his eyes grow wide.
“I am.”

Join Archibald on his first adventure, as he discovers God’s purpose for his life and meets Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.

Some say cats have nine lives, but Archibald only had one. However, while looking for his forever home, God placed Archibald in different lands and times to see amazing miracles that He did for His people. With lessons intertwined within each story and four included devotionals for you and your child at the back of the books in the series, these stories are sure to become a favorite. Each book also includes a “Find the Hidden Character” fun feature for younger children to look for as they listen. Included devotionals written by Karen Michelle Ricci.

See the Reviews and buy a Kindle or Paperback copy on Amazon.

 Win a Paperback Copy of Archibald’s First Bible Adventure below, Archibald and the Fiery Furnace by Laura J. Marshall. 

a Rafflecopter giveaway

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

What’s Wrong With Christian Films and Writing? — Post by Mary C. Findley

books nd movies

I recently read an article titled “What’s Wrong With Christian Filmmaking?” by Nate Fleming. He is a screenwriter, so he has more experience with that specific genre than I do. I am, however, and experienced writer, both of fiction and nonfiction, as well as a Christian of many years. I want to go through his article point by point. You can read here: . I have serious questions that need answers, because clearly there are things he says that I do not understand, and even words he seems to define in ways I don’t agree with.

Like most people who write commentary, he begins with something positive, applauding some aspects of recent Christian films like God’s Not Dead. He rehearses the grand historical tradition of Christians sponsoring and producing masterpieces in all genres, and yet you can hear a huge “but” coming. There are, in fact, multiple buts on the author’s mind.

He says Christians are limited because they want films to be “safe”. What does he mean by the word safe? I get the impression that he wants films that offend. We wrote a post some time back about the Son of God movie. There is such a painful division every time one of these films called “Christian” comes out. Some support such a film wholeheartedly and attack angrily, with venom and unchristian vigor, anyone who disagrees.  Some express concern over minor or more major points they disagree with. Unbelievers sometimes try to be objective in their reviews but the overwhelming point everyone seems to agree on is that most of these films divide believers and do not change the unsaved. Christians have differing opinions, but Fleming is correct that it’s mostly only Christians who go to or give thoughtful attention to such movies.

Will this change if Christian films are no longer safe? If there are R-rated Christian films, will the unsaved say, “Yay! There’s swearing (or explicit sex, or lurid violence) in that Christian movie! I’ll go see it because it’ll be realistic.”? In the words of the Apostle Paul, “I speak as a fool.” But I am not entirely sure that Fleming doesn’t think this way. As an author, I hear and see many negative books reviews about books that are “too Christian”. Even if the book’s description clearly says it is Christian, it gets attacked for the same “flaws” that Fleming is concerned about. I saw negative reviews on a fictional work because the Christian reader didn’t want the author to address the subject of incestuous rape. So Christians can write in “too Christian” a fashion, or be not Christian enough, or not take enough risks. They can’t win, in other words.

Fleming also ponders the question of “challenging” your faith. What does he mean? Paul admonishes us to inspect the fruits of faith, to examine ourselves to be sure we are in the faith. He also says there are unbelievers posing as believers, and people who are self-deceived, or deceived by others into believing what is false. These are pretty easy to understand. But to challenge a person’s faith is to say, “I don’t believe it’s real, or strong enough, or pure enough … “ Or does it mean that? I have a sneaking suspicion it really means “make Christians miserable”.

Fleming looks forward to Aronofsky’s Noah movie exactly because it won’t conform to Christian guidelines. I confess I am disturbed by that. He says that he expects it to be a blockbuster, and will draw non-Christians in a way Christians cannot do. Fleming wants us to be able to draw the unsaved in to see our films. He repeats that he respects Christian filmmakers. But he wants the pulpit out of the theater. Is he actually demanding that Christian filmmakers be provocative, that they start arguments? He practically begs them to stop giving people answers.

I am already uncomfortable listening to writers in Christian groups who claim to be grappling with these issues. We need to communicate God’s truth to the world. Whatever Fleming believes, presenting the truth of God’s Word is not always safe or comfortable for believers or unbelievers. Why do you think unbelievers twist and pervert and gut the Word when they make movies out of “Bible stories”? Solomon did not become an idolater because of the Queen of Sheba. Quite the opposite. Joseph was not a spoiled brat whose brothers had good reasons for hating him. Even believers attribute ungodly compromise to Esther and even Mordecai every step of the way in the latest retellings of Esther. These same believers insist that Jesus continually “hung out” with sinners.

I am sad to say that the other side of the coin is also true. Some Christians are grossly ignorant of what the Bible does contain. People eat their children. Soldiers disembowel pregnant women. Babies are smashed into rocks. There is a lot about sex in the Bible, good and bad kinds. But the fact is that such material is minimal compared to the overall content. What the Bible has is answers. Sometimes there are sinners sinning, questions raised that aren’t answered right then, and thought– and discussion-provoking events.

There’s a whole mythical belief set about the Bible that has grown up out of some wrongheaded people’s ideas. I don’t know if they are misguided believers or outright deceivers, but they don’t teach the truth about God or how He want’s His message delivered. They clamor to be edgy, to push limits, to strip away boundaries. What they often mean is they want to put the world in their works because that’s what attracts the world. Christian books are filled with flawed, fallen, out-of-control people who cannot govern themselves, have normal relationships, or guide others to spiritual truth. But they are real, insist the writers.

Listen, people: “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world – the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the World. And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever.”

We cannot be guilty of compromise just by claiming we are going to attract a broader audience. We cannot approach the world on their own terms. We have to approach them on God’s terms, with God’s truth.


Filed under Bible Teaching, Current Issues, Politics

Attitude — Post by Michael J. Findley


This might just be the sin which destroys American Christianity.

This is how God’s children and the devil’s children are distinguished. No person who fails to practice righteousness and to love his brother is from God. This is the message that you have heard from the beginning: We should love one another. Do not be like Cain, who was from the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because what he was doing was evil and his brother’s actions were righteous. (1 John 3:10-12 ISV)

You have probably read this so often that you know what it says without reading it. But do you understand what John is saying?

This is probably the last letter John wrote, therefore, the last book written in the Bible. It closes with the words Little children, keep yourselves away from idols. (1 John 5:21 ISV) An idol is anything you place between yourself and God. Yes, I am certain that you already knew that.

However, John’s point is that when that idol is revealed, made manifest, exposed, we explode in rage. The first child, Cain exploded in rage when his brother’s righteousness exposed his sin. Cain walked and talked with God. He was, to use a modern comparison, a “church member.” He was “raised in the Church.” Yet what he was doing was evil.

Throughout history, great acts of evil were often initiated by the people close to God. Cain’s sins eventually led to the destruction of the entire earth with a universal flood.

God in His mercy and grace saved Noah and his family. Yet their children quickly rebelled against the Lord, corrupted His Word and built a tower which God judged.
When Moses went up to speak to God face to face on Mount Sinai, Aaron and the children of Israel built a golden calf to worship and party around.

Until they were led away into captivity in Babylon, the children of Israel continued to worship idols in high places. Jeroboam I, when he rebelled against Solomon’s son Rehoboam, built golden calves for the Northern Kingdom to worship in Dan and Bethel.

Just before he was stoned by the leaders of the Jews, Stephen pointed out that this idolatrous attitude crucified Jesus. “You stubborn people with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are always opposing the Holy Spirit, just as your ancestors used to do. Which of the prophets did your ancestors fail to persecute? They killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One, and now you have become his betrayers and murderers.” (Acts 7:52-53 ISV)

Dr. John MacArthur had a conference on “Strange Fire” which pointed out how Americans do what they want without any concern for the teaching of the Word of God. This series faced a storm of criticism when it was published. The Church of the United States is filled with unbelievers who do what they want to do and are in control of worship services.

The first time I heard someone tell me that they went to praise services but would not attend or even listen to sermons I told him that his attitude was not that of a believer in Christ Jesus. Since then, I have found this to be a common attitude. Paul told Timothy to Preach the Word, be instant in season and out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine. (I Timothy 4:12 MKJV)

Paul also told the Romans that without preaching there was no salvation. How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without preaching? (Romans 10:14 MKJV)

Read this blog carefully. What have we set up in our hearts as an idol between us and the Lord Jesus Christ. What are you unwilling to give up to serve Him?


Filed under Bible Teaching, Current Issues, Politics